Graflex.org

[Westshore]

I like the look and feel of the XL. How would it do as a part time camera for portraiture? The rf is so bright (compared to my twin lens Mamiya) and with the film backs and poloroid back, it looks like a good way to go to 6x7 for portraits.

Any draw backs?

[antjam65]

There are some really nice 'portrait length' lenses available for the XL: the 150mm Rodenstock Ysarex and the 180mm Rodenstock Rotelar and Zeiss Sonnar. All of these lenses take great photos. The Ysarex is a simple 4-element Tessar-type lens, but is incredibly sharp (mine is, anyway). This lens reminds me of some scientific instrument when I see the wiry sharpness of the photos it takes. Although in the Graflex XL literature the Ysarex is recommended for 'head and shoulder portraits', I'm not sure the aforementioned qualities lend themselves to portraiture. Of course, it's a matter of style - if you want 'truthful', detailed portraits, it would be great. Both 180mm lenses are also superb, being very sharp, but 'fuller' and less 'wiry' in their sharpness (is that understandable?). The problem is, for my taste, these longer lenses don't really focus close enough for portraiture. You cannot take a tight head shot with any of them. They may have been designed like that to prevent potential rangefinder inaccuracies from becoming an issue? The 150mm focuses to 8 feet and the 180's focus to 10', as I recall.
Your question points out what, to me, is a frustration of the XL system. One that may be shared by other medium format rangefinder cameras, I suppose. There is no experience to be had with the XL that can match focusing in close on a pretty face with my 105mm Nikkor.